Are you kidding me? We spent almost $50,000.00 for this guy and McCurry to do what? Get the PM on FOX or CNN, to say what?To tell Americans what a great banking system we have? How we in Canada did everything right while the rest of the world fiddled?
Seriously. The PM's staff, coupled with our staff on the ground in the US, isn't capable of setting up media events? Worse yet, doesn't he have people capable of providing briefing notes in preparation of a G20 meeting?
You'll note where our media had to source the information of course:
In a filing with the Foreign Agents Registration Unit of the U.S. Justice Department, Fleischer reported that payment for his services came "in the form of a fixed fee" negotiated with Kory Teneycke, Harper's director of communications.
And perhaps you noticed just how valued 'access to information', in this country is to this PM.
Fleischer's "registration statement" with the Justice Department provides a rare glimpse into the communications strategies employed by Harper, who has frequently clashed with members of the Canadian press gallery over issues of access.
Fleischer's filing included a copy of the statement of work — called the "Project G20 Media Plan" — authored by the Prime Minister's Office. It outlines Harper's objectives in hiring a U.S.-based media consultant.
You'll also no doubt be aware of just how effective the PM has been in communicating Canada's position on issues given Napolitano's and McCain's pronouncements.
And what the heck is going on with Kevin Gaudet?
A spokesman for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, which scrutinizes and often criticizes government spending, said Harper's office appeared to meet its objectives.
Value for money? Seriously? I'd say Mr. Gaudet just showed his hand in pretty spectacular fashion. The PM may have met his objective, but how in hell does that translate to tax dollars well spent?
Just sayin'...Ignatieff seems to have no problem meeting with those who matter without hiring the likes of Fleischer.
Getting our message out to the US is important but I'm still trying to figure out why you'd hire the guy, that worked for the guy, who had the worse PR on the planet?
15 comments:
Imagine if we spent that 50 grand on a Washington lobbyist to argue Canada's case to legislators, instead of trying to make Harper look relevant?
The people of Iraq who are experiencing freedom for the first time in their history surely would not agree that President George Walker Bush had the worst P.R on the planet, now would you?
Worse P.R that Castro or Jong-Il or Jintao or Chavez?
Give your BDS a rest.
Precisely Steve.
I'm fine with getting the message out, but this is all about Harper and I certainly haven't seen the dividends.
What a waste of TAXPAYER money.
This is just another example of
"Conservative Fiscal Prudence"
And they have the "balls" to talk about the Liberals?
Anon, what planet exactly are you living on?
Do you mean to tell me that aside from Fleischer, Cheney and Bush, there are really people out there that believe that Iraq made sense? Gawd!
And yes, Bush had worse PR than those you mentioned because he felt he had the right to impose his insanity on the world. It doesn't absolve the others, but Bush was just as insane and wielded more power.
BDS?
Big Winnie...that's about all they can do, is talk about the Liberals, still.
After all this time in power, they still revert to 'the Liberals did this...it's the Liberals fault...when they were in power'...
It's pathological.
I've never witnessed such blatant disregard for promises made. The list grows.
Cost of "Project G20 Media Plan" = $50,000.00.
Fact the Harper had to hire someone to convince the media to give him the time of day = priceless
All the king's horses
and all the king's men
couldn't get Harper off the sh*tter
in time for his photo-op.
Money well wasted.
Worse: This is a political "end around" around our electoral advertising laws... He's spending money in order to get his face on TV - knowing full well that face time is face time during a campaign.
How many of these "favors" will come back to them during a campaign. Will Canadian voters who are sick of seeing "politics, politics, politics" and try to "tune out" with American TV, end up seeing Harper on Leno, Larry King, and Fox "all the time"...?
Guess what, though? We can do it too! And better! He's trying to live down the shame of being upstaged by "Iggy In Times Square"... LOL...
Yes, so Harper can brag about the financial system carefully reined in by Paul Martin that prevented Canadian banks from going down the same road as their reckless American counterparts. So Harper can avoid mentioning just how close he came to undoing all that before the meltdown hit. Martin essentially saved the Canadian banks from themselves, something Furious Leader never appreciated until it save his bacon.
Ignatieff was "invited" - Harper had to pay his way in.
Harper doesn't want Canadian media dealing with this because we know that Harper lobbied against, and vote NO to the Chretien/Martin banking regs.
Now, Harper, who was absolutely against it, is pounding his chest in the US as if he managed the situtation.
I was at a funeral recently and relatives of the deceased were up from the States to attend - they didn't know who the hell Harper was and that was after Harper's media stints. One lady said, is that the guy who looks so unhappy and has JFK hair?
I said, yup, that sounds like him.
What "Chretien/Martin banking regs" would those be? The Bank Act that we have today was passed by Brian Mulroney, and all Chretien did was take a poll on public opinion about bank mergers (same as he did on Iraq, the coward. He never made *any* leadership decisions without figuring out how many votes he stood to gain or lose by it). And the great financial 'success' that the liberal-friendly Canadian media would have you believe in was a gift given to him by thetwo Mulroney policies of the GST and Free Trade....both of which he vehemently OPPOSED while in oposition, only to turn around and embrace them when he won government.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has demonstrated more actual leadership in the last 2-3 years than Chretien/Martin did in 13. Would you like to see a list? ;)
(oh, and BDS = Bush Derangement Syndrome...something that you people are very familiar with by the look of things...)
FredfromBC - where were you in the 90's - sleeping?
Banker mergers, etc. were the talk of the day - fear amongst business folks - and yes, Chretien/Martin DID straighten it out.
I know - because I worked at a firm that were concerned at the time and the talk everywhere was worry about mergers....so cut the crap.
FredfromBC - where were you in the 90's - sleeping?
Banker mergers, etc. were the talk of the day - fear amongst business folks - and yes, Chretien/Martin DID straighten it out.
I know - because I worked at a firm that were concerned at the time and the talk everywhere was worry about mergers....so cut the crap.
FredfromBC - your response is about as stupid a partisan pack of BS as I've ever seen - work for Harper do you?
So "Fred": You're admitting that Mulroney IS a Conservative? Don't you people HATE the guy? Mulroney's politics were more progressive (far more) than these Reformers'.
Oh, and the bank regulations: Where were you? Read about Mr. Martin's meetings with all four banks. Read about the Senate Committees. Read about the face-off, and maybe forget your blissful ignorance.
We know you guys (thanks to your leader) are full-time revisionists. Heck, he's changed anything he believes in and flip-flopped on everything. You've all cheated in elections, etc, etc. You can't rewrite such recent history. Nice try.
Post a Comment